The Right Kind of Hero

by  Lance Thompson

The Academy Awards are imminent, and Clint Eastwood’s immensely entertaining and thematically engaging GRAN TORINO was not nominated in any category.  Eastwood has been honored repeatedly by Oscar, winning for his masterful Western UNFORGIVEN, and for his emotionally-charged boxing film MILLION DOLLAR BABY, and nominated repeatedly for his other cinematic achievements.  But those films had the right, or rather left, political leanings, and GRAN TORINO is too conservative for Academy recognition.  This is not the first time Eastwood has been dissed by the film industry’s self-congratulatory soiree. 

In 1971, two gritty, action-packed police dramas were released–THE FRENCH CONNECTION and DIRTY HARRY.  Both were about rogue cops who ignore the rules and follow their own brands of justice.  Both were popular, entertaining and stylishly mounted.  THE FRENCH CONNECTION was nominated for eight Academy Awards and won five, including best picture, actor, director and adapted screenplay.  DIRTY HARRY was not nominated in any category.

Why did these evidently similar dramas receive such different treatment?  The directors–William Friedkin and Don Siegel–are both accomplished film makers.  The screenplays were both taut and suspenseful.  The actors in the lead roles were convincingly intense and compellingly watchable.  The difference is that THE FRENCH CONNECTION embraced liberal views, and DIRTY HARRY did not. 

The FRENCH CONNECTION’s hero, Popeye Doyle, fights against a nebulous, impenetrable and ubiquitous narcotics network.  He is amoral, out of control, and self-destructive.  His efforts are violent and, ultimately, ineffectual.  He is unable to crack the narcotics case, accidentally shoots a federal officer, and ends up with little to show for his efforts.  This is the liberal view of police–dangerous, out of control and useless in fighting crime.  Additionally, the federal government is shown to be an accomplice of the drug dealers, the French criminals are smarter than the American police, and the entire effort to interdict the flow of illegal drugs is shown to be hopeless.  Nowhere are the victims of the drug trade shown–those who traffic in illegal narcotics are shown merely as glamorous businessmen.  The liberal world view could not be more clearly expressed.

Dirty Harry’s adversaries are, first, a psychopathic killer, and, second, the laws that protect him.  Harry is a homicide detective who sympathizes with the victims of the killer, and goes after him with a single-minded obsession.  He violates the rules, just as Doyle does, but with the critical distinction that he is successful.  Disobeying orders, he hunts down and kills the ruthless murderer, thus prevailing in the struggle against evil.  In ridding the world of a dangerous predator, he clashes with, disparages and ultimately ignores the civil rights of the murderer.  But to liberals, Harry is a greater threat to society than the killer he’s chasing.

Reviews tell the story.  THE FRENCH CONNECTION is lauded for its stylish action sequences, intense performances and gritty, realistic story.  Roger Ebert praised the film, and Hackman’s “frightening singlemindedness, a cold determination to win at all costs.”  Yet in his review of DIRTY HARRY, Ebert dismisses it as another Eastwood action thriller, and adds, “The movie’s moral position is fascist.  No doubt about it.”  Variety decries its glorification of police brutality.  Judith Crist ridiculed the film as a “gut-bashing, brain splattering cop movie.” 

DIRTY HARRY demonstrates that the most vicious criminals must be dealt with viciously, and that they too often hide behind the rights of the accused so widely expanded in the 60's.  DIRTY HARRY is not afraid to name names–Miranda and Escobedo are brought up by the district attorney when Harry violates those statutes when he arrests the killer.  Dirty Harry the character has the wrong politics, and so does the movie, as far as the Academy was concerned.

DIRTY HARRY the movie has a strong political viewpoint that offends the liberals in Hollywood, while THE FRENCH CONNECTION reinforces their views.  Thus one film is honored, the other ignored.  Yet today, thirty-five years later, the character of Dirty Harry is an American icon, some of the film’s dialogue has gained the status of the immortal utterances of the cinema, and the issues it deals with are still relevant and hotly debated.  The same cannot be said of THE FRENCH CONNECTION.

DIRTY HARRY took a strong stand and didn’t temporize.  People of different political views could debate the issues it raised.  It was a powerful, challenging, controversial film–the kind the Academy likes to think of itself as supporting and honoring, as long as the stand the film takes is the liberal one.

GRAN TORINO also takes a strong stand, and the main character is hard-edged and unlikeable.  Both film and character recognize the presence of evil in our society, and demonstrate that it must be confronted and opposed.  Moreover, this is an individual responsibility, despite the consequences.  This view is antithetical to the liberal philosophy that is most prevalent in Hollywood.

Another aspect of GRAN TORINO the Hollywood elites probably object to–half the shots in the movie feature some American icon in the frame–a flag, an eagle, a Colt pistol, Pabst Blue Ribbon Beer, the Gran Torino of the title.  And don’t forget the movie’s most powerful American icon of all–Clint himself.  A filmmaker who always goes his own way, sets trends rather than follows them, and takes risks that most of Hollywood would never dare. 

The most regrettable part of watching GRAN TORINO is realizing that one of our greatest movie makers is on, as Eastwood the avid golfer once put it, “the back nine.”  The voice and vision he has brought to audiences for half a century will some day end.   But if this is, as Eastwood has indicated, his last appearance in front of the camera, then long time fans have something to be thankful for.  He gets better year after year and he’s playing at the top of his game, whether the Academy recognizes it or not.